The charges of first-degree murder for the
killing of an infant in a small Georgia town bear the hallmarks of
notorious racist frame-ups of the past, writes Jen Roesch.

De'Marquis Elkins appears in the Glynn County Court
THE STATE of Georgia seems to be in the process of adding another
travesty of justice to the long list of them inflicted on African
Americans.
Two Black teenagers have been imprisoned without bail for more than
four months on charges that they shot and killed an infant at
point-blank range after her mother told them she had to money. But there
are no witnesses other than the mother, no physical evidence tying the
two accused to the crime, and no real explanation for why the young men
would commit such a cold-blooded crime.
The only "evidence" against them is the claims of the white mother,
which have holes and inconsistencies--and an ugly campaign by
authorities and the media to portray one of the accused, along was his
whole family, as a bunch of criminals and thugs.
From the behavior of cops and prosecutors to the media circus that
has surrounded the case, the so-called "Baby Santiago" murder bears all
the hallmarks of racist frame-ups of the past. In the wake of the
acquittal of George Zimmerman for killing Trayvon Martin, this case
shows another face of the criminal injustice system--and how it is
saturated with racism, through and through.
The murder of 13-month old Antonio Santiago in Brunswick, Ga., began
to dominate the news headlines in late March. The baby's mother, Sherry
West, said she was pushing the baby in his stroller when she was
approached by two Black teenagers. She claimed that they demanded
money--and that when she told them she didn't have any, they walked
around the stroller to shoot the baby in the face.
A few days later, 17-year-old De'Marquis Elkins and 15-year-old
Dominique Lang were arrested and charged with first-degree murder.
The arrests happened around the same time Zimmerman was preparing for
the murder trial, so the Georgia case immediately became a focal point
for racist right-wingers. Zimmerman's brother immediately tweeted: "'Lib
media shld ask if what these2 black teens did 2 a woman&baby is the
reason ppl think blacks mightB risky."
CNN's Piers Morgan did a widely broadcast interview with Sherry West
where she called for the death penalty for both teenagers. The media
speculated about what could possibly have motivated the two teenagers to
commit such a terrible crime.
Fast forward to July, and the media are now reporting what they label
a "shocking development." The full report from the criminal
investigation, which has now been handed over to defense lawyers for the
two teens, shows that testing done the day of the murder found gunshot
residue on the hands of both West and the baby's father, Luis Santiago.
While this could be explained in West's case by her proximity to the
shooting, there is no explanation for why Santiago would have such
residue on him. Both parents claim Luis Santiago was shopping at
Wal-Mart at the time of the shooting. But the state forensic report states
that the evidence "supports the possibility that [Luis Santiago]
discharged a firearm, was in close proximity to a firearm upon
discharge, or came into contact with an item whose surface bears GSR
[gunshot residue]."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
THIS REVELATION certainly raises a case for reasonable doubt that
Elkins and Lang killed anyone, but it also sheds light on the pervasive
racism that has shaped this case from the beginning.
The prosecution has stated that it doesn't consider either parent a
suspect. Even without the recently revealed evidence about gunshot
residue, this would be surprising. According to a 2010 CNN report,
approximately 550 children killed in the U.S. each year, nearly
two-thirds are killed by a parent. Sherry West was the only eyewitness
to the crime. On the basis of these two facts alone, she and the father
should at least have been considered as potential suspects.
But there are more troubling factors that arose early in the
investigation. West's adult daughter told police that she was concerned
by her mother asking questions about how quickly she could collect on
the baby's life insurance policy. The daughter also said her mother's
stories were inconsistent. West herself clearly lied when she told CNN in March
that police had conducted forensic testing and not found any gunshot
residue. And neither she nor Luis Santiago have a credible story for why
residue would have been found on his hands that day.
None of this proves that the parents were involved in the murder of
their baby. But the facts do raise questions that should have been and
still should be investigated. This is particularly true given the
precedent of women killing their own children and pointing the finger at
Black men. The most notorious of these cases was Susan Smith, who
claimed a Black assailant had carjacked her car, with her sons in the
backseat. She later confessed she had drowned the boys by letting the
car roll into the water.
However, local police have shown little interest in pursuing any
other leads. Sherry West's daughter said that police have not followed
up with her after she voiced her suspicions. The police and prosecutors
had access to the recently released forensic evidence and apparently
didn't follow up with any questioning of either Luis Santiago or Sherry
West.
Instead, from the start, local authorities have seemed intent on
accepting West's story at face value. Police conducted a local manhunt
and then constructed a case against two teenagers when they appeared to
fit the bill.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ALL THIS bears many of the ugly hallmarks of racist frame-ups. As
much as this case raises the specter of the Susan Smith trial, it also
eerily echoes the false accusations and the media uproar of the Central
Park jogger case in New York City in 1989.
In that case, too, there was very little information to go on and no
eyewitnesses--the victim of the rape and assault was found barely alive.
So police rounded up Black and Brown teenagers, violated their rights,
coerced false confessions out of four of them, vilified them and their
families, and railroaded them to prison for many years each. They were
only proven innocent years later when another man confessed to the
crime.
In the Baby Santiago case, the only information police had was West's
claim that two Black males, who she estimated to be between the ages of
10 and 15, had committed the crime. West provided no detailed physical
description--at one point, she said the younger boy could be as young as
5.
Police went to the local school and asked for attendance records to
be turned over to them, and then went door-to-door looking for suspects.
This is what led to Elkins and Lang, who were then picked out of a
police line-up by West. Both are significantly older than West's initial
report.
This eyewitness identification is the main evidence against the two
young men. But even setting aside the holes in West's "identification"
of the two, we also know from the work of experts such as the Innocence
Project that eyewitness misidentification is one of the biggest factors
in wrongful convictions. This makes physical evidence and witness
credibility all the more important in cases that depend on eyewitness
testimony--and neither exist here.
Instead, the case against Elkins and Lang relies on racist
assumptions, circumstantial evidence and aggressive policing, bordering
on harassment.
Within days of the arrest of the two, Elkins' mother, sister and aunt
were all arrested on charges of fabricating false testimony. No one has
revealed what the false testimony was, but it seems that the aunt and
mother gave conflicting alibis for Elkins. The sister is also charged
with dumping a handgun belonging to De'Marquis Elkins. This handgun has
been consistently described by police as the murder weapon, but there is
no physical evidence to prove that contention.
Incredibly, a Brunswick city commissioner and mayor pro tem--James
Henry Brooks Sr., who is African American--was arrested and charged with
influencing a witness and obstructing police after he stepped in
between Elkins' mother and officers, and advised her not to talk to
police without a lawyer present.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
RATHER THAN investigate any of the pressing questions about the
parents of the victim or consider the stories of the two young accused,
prosecutors and police, along with a willing media, seem intent on
destroying the reputation of the entire Elkins family.
Watching news accounts, one could easily conclude that this is a
family of hardened criminals. But the women in the family have been
charged variously with shoplifting, speeding and driving without a
license. De'Marquise's only previous arrest was for marijuana
possession. He was recently identified as the suspect in an armed
robbery of a local pastor, but he hasn't been convicted. There is
nothing in his history or background to suggest he would be the
cold-blooded murder of an infant in his stroller.
Yet this is the story that the media have accepted without question for months.
De'Marquise Elkins and Dominique Lang have been behind bars since
their arrest--they were denied bail, despite a lack of previous felony
convictions. Both young men are being charged as adults with
first-degree malice murder and face life in prison if convicted. The
only reason they don't face the death penalty is because Georgia bars
the execution of juveniles. Elkins' aunt is also still in jail, and all
his family members will be tried together in his case. They face trial
starting August 19.
Elkins and Lang have pled not guilty, and their lawyers will
therefore have the opportunity to show reasonable doubt about their
guilt, especially given the police mishandling of the case. But it's
chilling to think that, given aggressive prosecution, the two teenagers
might easily have been pressured into a guilty plea to a lesser charge
in exchange for reduced jail time. If they had, the recently revealed
evidence about gunshot residue would have never come to light, and they
would have had no opportunity to clear their names.
All this reveals how easily cases can be constructed against Black
men for the most heinous crimes, even when there is no actual evidence
and plenty of more likely suspects.
It's certainly possible that Elkins and Lang were involved in the
murder of Antonio Santiago. But it's equally possible--probably more
so--that they were just two Black teenagers who happened to skip school
on the wrong day. That's the racist Russian roulette of the U.S.
criminal justice system.

Nicole Colson
reports on the conviction of military whistle-blower Bradley
Manning--and the chilling message it sends about political dissent in
the "war on terror" era.

Bradley Manning being led into court
MILITARY JUDGE Col. Denise Lind found Pfc. Bradley Manning guilty of
almost every charge leveled against him for his role as a military
whistle-blower--but not guilty of the most serious charge of "aiding the
enemy."
While the outcome on the "aiding the enemy" charge is seen by
supporters as a victory, Manning, who released classified documents and
video to the muckraking WikiLeaks website, still faces as many as 136
years in prison on 19 other charges, including six counts of violating
the Espionage Act and five counts of stealing government property.
The sentencing phase of the trial will begin on July 31 and is
expected to take at least a month before Lind rules. But Manning will
almost certainly spend most of the rest of his life behind bars--unless
pressure is brought to bear on the military to relent.
The not guilty verdict on the most serious charge against Manning--of
aiding the enemy--is important. The failure of the government to make
this charge stick is an indication of its overreach.
Prosecutors tried a desperate eleventh-hour move to win a guilty
verdict on this charge, too. Toward the end of the case, they recalled
former Army Specialist Jihrleah Showman--a one-time supervisor of
Manning's--who suddenly claimed that Manning had expressed
"anti-American" sentiments, and that she had at one time suspected
Manning of being a spy. Showman had never documented any of these
alleged concerns.
The wild accusations were in keeping with the prosecution's attitude
throughout the trial. Manning was portrayed as a traitor and
"anarchist," maliciously bent on harming American interests--rather than
what he is: someone who believed the American people have the right to
know about the crimes being committed by their government in their name.
The outcome on the "aiding the enemy" charge is important for another
reason--it represents a small pushback against the Obama
administration's all-out war on whistle-blowers. If Manning had been
convicted on this charge, it would have opened the door to accusing
anyone responsible for publishing classified information, including
journalists working for mainstream publications, of treason.Accoridng to the New York Times,
the judge's decision "pulled back from the government's effort to
create a precedent that press freedom specialists had warned could have
broad consequences for the future of investigative journalism about
national security in the Internet era."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
EVEN SO, the conviction on 19 of 21 counts will send a chilling
message to other potential government whistle-blowers to not come
forward. That Manning likely will spend decades more behind
bars--perhaps his whole life--is a travesty of justice for a young
soldier whose "crime" was to expose the illegal and barbaric behavior of
the U.S. government.As Gregg Leslie, legal defense director for the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, said
following the conviction, "Whistle-blowers always know they are taking
risks, and the more they reveal, the bigger the threat is against them.
But we know they are not betraying the government. And when they
contribute vital information to an important public debate, it should
not be a crime--especially the kind of crime that sends you to jail for
the rest of your life."
There can be no doubt about the importance of what Manning brought to
light with his act of conscience in handing over documents to
WikiLeaks. According to a statement from Reporters Without Borders:

The information that Manning allegedly passed to WikiLeaks--used by newspapers such as the New York Times, The Guardian, Der Spiegel and Le Monde
in coordination with Julian Assange's website--included revelations of
grave abuses in the "war on terror" launched by the Bush
administration...Should this reality have been concealed from the U.S.
public and international opinion? Which was more serious--committing
such crimes or revealing them to the public?

For the Obama administration, the answer to the latter question is
obvious. That's why the administration has made a practice of
prosecuting whistle-blowers under the 1917 Espionage Act. The law has
traditionally been used, as its name implies, against those accused of
spying.
Manning is now the seventh whistle-blower during the Obama years to
be charged under the Espionage Act. National Security Agency leaker
Edward Snowden is the eighth. Under every previous administration
combined dating back to 1917, there were just three similar
prosecutions.As Widney Brown, senior director of International Law and Policy at Amnesty International, wrote after the verdict:

The government's priorities are upside down. The U.S. government has
refused to investigate credible allegations of torture and other crimes
under international law despite overwhelming evidence.
Yet they decided to prosecute Manning who it seems was trying to do
the right thing--reveal credible evidence of unlawful behavior by the
government. You investigate and prosecute those who destroy the
credibility of the government by engaging in acts such as torture which
are prohibited under the US Constitution and in international law.

Obama came to office promising the most transparent administration ever.
He claims that we need an open and frank discussion of what the
government should be able to do to protect ourselves from threats, but
did so only after its secret operations were exposed. And he
aggressively prosecutes those whose actions give rise to the questions
he claims should be answered through a national debate...
There are two ways in which any government can seek to control
security leaks. The first is by honesty and transparency, by allowing
the public to know enough to make democratic decisions about how far is
too far. That is the path that the United States, and this president,
claims to follow. The second is by threatening draconian consequences to
anyone who exposes questionable policies and practices to the light of
day. That is the path the United States, and this administration, has
chosen with the prosecution of Bradley Manning and others.
No amount of sophistry can hide that truth, try as the administration
might. The result, for Bradley Manning, is many years in prison.

picture by google
People
will pack the Inglewood Courthouse, at One Regent Street in Inglewood
(one block south of Florence between La Brea and Fir) on Wednesday, July
31 at 8:30 AM, in courtroom 02A, to demand Justice for Etana and Mecca
Shakur, two Black Riders Liberation Party comrade sisters, who defended
themselves against a racist assault by the Inglewood PD while doing
community work, and are falsely charged with alleged assault and Battery
on a police officer.

The Hands Off Africa Movement, initiated by the BRLP, is
demanding Hands Off Etana and Mecca Shakur, drop all charges! The
campaign, which is on-going, is organizing for Justice for Trayvon,
support for the prison hunger strikers, to free all political prisoners,
and to withdraw all racist US/NATO forces from Africa. They also demand
Hands Off Assata
Shakur and Cuba.

HUNGER FOR JUSTICE
Join family members, Danny Glover, Mike Farrell & religious leaders at a Solidarity Fast
Rally & Press Conference
Wednesday, July 31st
12 noon 2pm
Downtown Los Angeles Federal Building
300 N. Los Angeles Street, LA 90012
On Wednesday July 31st, people
around the world will fast and take other peaceful non-violent action in
solidarity with the California Prisoner Hunger Strikers. Join family
members of hunger strikers along with James Cromwell, Angela Davis, Mike
Farrell, Danny Glover, Elliott Gould, Chris Hedges, Alice Walker, and
Cornel West. We fast knowing that the criminalization that killed
Trayvon Martin, and the criminalization that justifies the torture of
prisoners in solitary confinement, are
one and the same.We fast in solidarity with the demands of the hunger
strikers. And we fast to get justice for Trayvon and for people of every
gender, race and religion who have been killed by state and vigilante
violence. Support efforts everywhere for Justice for Trayvon Martin.

“We have taken up this hunger strike and work stoppage... not only
to improve our own conditions but also an act of solidarity with all
prisoners and oppressed people around the world.” Hunger Strikers in
the Short Corridor Collective at Pelican Bay State Prison SHU

Follow-up: Sunday, August 4 at 1:00 PM, the Inter-Communal
Solidarity Committee (including Break the Lock, Turning the Tide, Hood
Health and George Jackson Freedom School programs) will have its monthly
meeting at the Left Side Lounge, 1905 Rodeo Rd. between Arlington and
Western (just south of the Metro Expo Line); followed at 4:00 PM by a
Jericho Amnesty Movement chapter meeting with letter-writing to
political prisoners. For more info, call 323-636-7388.

There is an emergency in Palestine right this very moment, but most
internationalists are too caught up in our own entitlements, our own
misunderstood history based on Broadway mythologies and Western
distortion, to act with the intensity that is warranted. Unless
solidarity and struggle shifts into high gear fast, there may be no
averting the tragedy already in the making - one on a scale which
dwarfs what has come before. These are the thoughts that whirl through
this author's head on traveling to the Middle East with my
just-turned 13-year-old son, my daughter, and my partner.....

SACRAMENTO — Supporters of California prison inmates on a weeks-long
mass hunger
strike convened on the Capitol Tuesday morning to urge Gov. Jerry
Brown to take a more active role in resolving the protest.

Around 50 people gathered on the Capitol's south lawn to show
support for the inmates on strike and call for changes to policies
regarding solitary confinement. Three organizers then delivered
petitions with more than 70,000 signatures to the governor's office.

Dolores Canales, co-founder of the California Families to Abolish
Solitary Confinement, broke into tears after presenting the signatures
to a member of the governor's staff.

"These prisoners are so committed to the cause that they would put
their own bodies through such suffering and be now on the 23rd day of
the hunger strike. It's because the message is of suffering. The
message is of torment," said Canales, whose son John Martinez has been
incarcerated at the Pelican Bay Security Housing Unit (SHU) for 18
years.

Ronald Ahnen, president of the inmates' rights group California
Prison Focus, said the duration of the strike has entered "dangerous
territory."

"I have grave concern about the health of the hunger strikers,"
Ahnen said. "It's time for the governor to step in and put an end to
this hunger strike by starting to negotiate with the prisoners."

The demonstrators later marched to the state corrections department
headquarters, just under a mile away.

The strike began July 8, as inmates objected to conditions in
isolation units and prison gang policies. The corrections department
said that as of Monday afternoon, 561 inmates in nine state prisons
were considered to be on strike, meaning they have missed nine or more
consecutive meals.

At its peak, more than 12,000 inmates were participating in the
hunger strike. 385 prisoners have been on strike continuously since it
began.

Amber Bernal, 32, said she drove up from San Diego to protest in
solidarity with her brother. Ruben Bernal, 37 is an inmate at Pelican
Bay SHU, the
same isolation unit that houses the organizers of the strike.

Bernal said she and other family members of inmates involved in the
strike have become a tight-knit group in their advocacy for their loved
ones.

"It's not about the crimes they've done. They're paying the price
for their crime already," she said. "We just ask they be treated like
human beings. No matter how you slice and dice it, solitary confinement
is torture."

Deborah Hoffman, a spokeswoman for the corrections department, said
the agency "has taken thoughtful steps over the past two years to
improve Security Housing Units because these units serve a vital role
in state prisons, keeping staff and other inmates safe from the same
violent gangs leading the hunger strike and terrorizing communities
across California."

Picture by google

Over the weekend, news came out that a hunger strike participant at
California State Prison, Corcoran had committed suicide. Billy Michael
Sell, 32, killed himself on July 22nd, two weeks after the launch of an
on-going statewide hunger strike against long-term solitary confinement
and related prison conditions. While the California Department of
Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) initially made a point of
claiming that Sell was not on hunger strike at the time of his death,
it confirmed
last afternoon that Sell had been on strike from July 8th until July
21st while in the Security Housing Unit (SHU).The Kings County Coroner
confirmed on Monday that Sell died as a result of hanging while in
solitary confinement. Sell, unlike most California hunger strikers, was
in the SHU since December 2007 for murdering his cellmate.
Approximately 3,000 of the 4,500 men held in the SHU are there for
alleged gang affiliation, and the remaining 1,500 are generally there
for set terms for disciplinary infractions.

Sell, nicknamed “Guero” by those who knew him, had been incarcerated
since 1999 on a life-sentence for attempted murder. Regardless of what
one thinks about the conduct of people in prison, the suicide of
prisoners and the desperation that has prompted three statewide
California prison hunger strikes is indicative of a system in crisis.
California remains under federal court supervision to ensure that
California reduces its overcrowded prison system, delivers
Constitutionally acceptable health services, and protects those
diagnosed as mentally ill.In his review of the 34 suicides in CDCR
facilities in 2011,
Dr. Patterson found that:

24 of 34 (70.6%) committed suicide in single-cell status

20 of 34 (61.8%) had a history of suicidal behavior

30 of 34 (88.2 %) had a history of mental health treatment

9 of 34 (26.5%) committed suicide in Administrative Segregation

2 of 34 (5.9%) committed suicide in the Security Housing Unit

1 of 34 (2.9%) committed suicide on death row

5 of 34 (14.7%) suicides were discovered after the process of
rigor mortis had begun, indicating 2-3 hours had passed before the
individuals were discovered

As is clear from this data, the suicides in California prisons
disproportionately occur in segregation units, and particularly with
inmates in solitary confinement. Solitary Watch has previously reported
on suicides in solitary confinement units. In 2011, prisoners Armando
Cruz and Alex
Machado committed suicide in California State Prison, Sacramento’s
Psychiatric Services Unit and Pelican Bay State Prison’s Administrative
Segregation Unit, respectively. Both had spent years in segregation
units, both had a history of self-harm and threatening to commit
suicide. Cruz had entered the prison system at the age of 17 with a
heavily documented history of psychosis, and his hallucinations are
documented to have become worse while being placed in and out of
segregation units. Machado was known as an intelligent jailhouse
lawyer with no history of psychological problems until being placed in
segregation at Pelican Bay following his validation as an associate of
the Mexican Mafia prison gang. Machado would attempt suicide and
exhibit bizarre behavior and paranoia in the months before committing
suicide.

In August 2012, Armando Morales committed suicide in Corcoran’s SHU.
Morales,
a Watts, California native, had spent years in the SHU. Morales,
according to individuals on his cell block, reported that he committed
suicide amidst pressure to debrief (or, “snitch”) on fellow prisoners.

Meanwhile, over 561 prisoners in nine prisons were on hunger strike
as of yesterday. According to CDCR, 322 have been on hunger strike the
entire three weeks. CDCR has previously said that hunger strikers who
have accepted drinks such as Kool-Aid were not going to be considered
on hunger strike, so the 561 figure may reflect individuals who have
accepted Kool-Aid but then rejected anything else since and are now
once again considered on hunger strike. According to CDCR policy, an
individual is only counted on hunger strike after refusing nine
consecutive meals. Solitary Watch has also received reports that
individuals at Pelican Bay who had ended their participation have
stated that they may resume striking should guards move hunger strike
participants to Ad Seg.

With the death of Sell, and the hunger strike now over three weeks,
there has been a growing spotlight on California, with Hollywood stars
even announcing
their support for reforms. With thousands in solitary confinement and
the prison system driving dozens a year to suicide, increasing
attention at least raises the possibility of meaningful policy review
and reforms.

Mediators
working on behalf of California prisoners on hunger strike are calling
for an independent investigation into the July 22 death of Billy
“Guero” Sell, a prisoner held in solitary confinement at Corcoran State
Prison and a participant in the 3-week-long hunger strike that has
shaken the California prison system. Sell’s death is being ruled a
suicide by the California
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). Prison
officials met with mediators last Tuesday, but failed to disclose the
fact that a hunger strike participant had died the previous day.

“We
are calling for an independent investigation to determine the
circumstances around Sell’s death, not just the ultimate cause”, said
Ron Ahnen of the mediation team. “The CDCR could have negotiated the
demands of the prisoners well before the strike began. Had they done
so, I am convinced that Billy Sell would still be with us today."

Fellow
prisoners reported that Sell had been requesting medical attention for
several days prior to his death. Attorneys received numerous reports of
medical neglect of the health needs of the strikers, and these reports
have generated an outcry from the medical community. Over 100 health
care providers have signed onto a letter denouncing the CDCR’s failure
to provide appropriate medical care to the strikers. It says in part:

We
urge CDCR to ensure that no prisoner on hunger strike be disciplined or
threatened with the denial of medical care, that prisoners not be
denied liquids, vitamins or any other form of sustenance they are
willing to take, and that they receive appropriate medical care. We
demand all medical professionals uphold their code of ethics and
maintain the highest standards of care for all their patients – be they
incarcerated or not.

Finally,
we call upon Governor Jerry Brown and CDCR Secretary Jeffrey Beard to
enter into good faith negotiations with the prisoner representatives,
and to respond to their demands, in order to end this crisis before
more lives are lost.

Leading
expert on prison health issues, Dr. Terry Kupers, signed on to the
statement, adding, "The prisoners on hunger strike are making a
courageous effort to speak up for their humanity and their rights. It
is extraordinarily callous of the CDCR and Governor Brown to ignore
their plea for reasonable relief, and then to fail even in providing
them adequate medical care."

Ahnen
reiterated the demands coming from many community members across the
state: “The time has come for Governor Brown to end this strike now by
ordering negotiations between prisoners and CDCR officials to begin
immediately. There is only one question I have for Governor Brown: how
many more prisoners will you allow to die before you begin
negotiations?”

A
complete copy of the health providers' letter is attached and pasted
below.

For
the third time in three years, thousands of prisoners in California are
currently on hunger strike, protesting the widespread use of punitive
long-term solitary confinement in the Security Housing Units (SHUs), in
some cases for over 30 years continuously.

The
current strike began on July 8, and over 1,000 prisoners have now gone
over two weeks without food, supported by over 30,000 who abstained
from eating for shorter periods. Two years ago when the 2011 California
prison hunger strikes mobilized over 12,000 people at their peak, the
State agreed to make significant improvements in prison conditions; but
has not carried through on most promised changes, particularly
regarding use of long term and indefinite isolation.

As
healthcare providers, we are issuing this statement to register our
concern with reports that appropriate medical care is being denied the
hunger striking prisoners. While there has been a concerted attempt by
the authorities to censor the strikers to keep the strike out of the
news, dozens of letters from affected strikers at a number of prisons
have gotten out to supporters repeating similar details of medical
neglect and abuse:

•Medications
are being withheld in an attempt to coerce prisoners into abandoning
their protest. According to attorney Marilyn McMahon, pain relief
medication in particular is being withheld, “even if it’s medicine that
should not be cut abruptly, but instead tapered off.” In one case a
patient with heart failure has had his medications discontinued on the
dubious assertion that he doesn’t need them because he’s on a hunger
strike.

•Prison
medical staff are required to monitor the health of prisoners on hunger
strike, yet we hear that some institutions are violating this protocol,
including not weighing the hunger strikers as required. There are also
reports that nurses who are required to conduct daily checks are simply
advising the prisoners to drink a lot of water. In other cases
physicians have been dismissive of patient complaints, prisoners in
need are being refused care and ignored, and in some cases even mocked
by the very healthcare practitioners they are supposed to be able to
depend upon for care.

•Some
prisoners have told the prison authorities that they are refusing solid
foods only, but CDCR refuses to provide them with liquid sustenance
other than water, and guards have even confiscated any such liquids
that they had in their cells.

•Many
prisoners have indicated that they are not being provided with medical
release form #7385, which they need to send to their loved ones, family
members or to outside supporters so that these people on the outside
can access their medical records.

•Several
prisoners have been reclassified as “not on hunger strike” because they
have been accused of having food in their cells. This means that they
“have to start over” and go 9 consecutive meals before being considered
on hunger strike again, regardless of whether or not they have in fact
broken their strike. Determining who is on hunger strike in such an
arbitrary manner means that prisoners who may not have eaten for weeks
will be dropped off the list for medical oversight.

Similar
denial of appropriate medical monitoring and medications occurred
during the 2011 prisoners’ hunger strikes, and led concerned medical
professionals to issue a statement condemning such coercive neglect as
both unethical and illegal under California Penal Code Section 673.
Furthermore, such acts of deliberate indifference to a patient’s
serious medical needs constitute a violation of prisoners’ Eighth
Amendment Constitutional rights.

Today,
we the undersigned find ourselves tragically having to echo the
statement of two years ago, in registering our grave concern about
these allegations, and in strongly urging Receiver J. Clark Kelso and
the California Medical Board to investigate these claims. We urge CDCR
to ensure that no prisoner on hunger strike be disciplined or
threatened with the denial of medical care, that prisoners not be
denied liquids, vitamins or any other form of sustenance they are
willing to take, and that they receive appropriate medical care. We
demand all medical professionals uphold their code of ethics and
maintain the highest standards of care for all their patients – be they
incarcerated or not.

Finally,
we call upon Governor Jerry Brown and CDCR Secretary Jeffrey Beard to
enter into good faith negotiations with the prisoner representatives,
and to respond to their demands, in order to end this crisis before
lives are lost.

Please
note that all organizational affiliations are being listed for
identification purposes only.

Welcome To My World

About Me

DARCY D= YOU MUST BELIEVE.STANDING UP FOR THE INNOCENT C.E.O
The United Kingdom resident champions causes of the voiceless, the powerless and the weak, particularly in North America. She campaigns for petitions on behalf of incarcerated human trafficking.